(New Zealand) A had given two charges over his shares to different lenders. The charges came to be both owned by the same person, who obtained judgment under the first charge, but then exercised its power of sale under the second, waiving its priority under the first. The chargor complained that the chargee should have exercised his power under the first charge which would have discharged the judgment.
Held: Owners of different mortgagees of a property can agree to alter the priority of their respective charges irrespective of the wishes of the chargor, and without needing his consent. The mortgagor had no control over which remedy was taken by the chargees.
Citations:
Gazette 08-Jan-1992, [1991] 4 All ER 989, [1991] UKPC 39
Links:
Citing:
Distinguished – Palmer v Hendrie 1859
. .
See Also – Cheah Theam Swee v Equiticorp Finance Group Ltd. And, Equiticorp Nominees Ltd PC 12-Jul-1989
New Zealand . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Company, Banking, Commonwealth
Updated: 19 May 2022; Ref: scu.78999
